tv [untitled] April 26, 2012 12:30pm-1:00pm PDT
anticipate the staff, it will be fully funded through federal and state dollars, how much will they allocate to us? we can see how we can accommodate that many. supervisor chu: be you anticipate your trend for food stamps to grow at this rate? >> we increase food stamp partition inflation -- the participation rate. we want to keep pushing and partner in with food bank and the farmers' markets, any sort of of reach approach we can do. again, should we need federal and state reimbursement --
[unintelligible] the rest of our presentation is just a few more slides. we will speak to does. -- to those. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i wanted to highlight a couple of our programs and just briefly. the first program is the community living fund, and as you can see, since 2008, we have served over 1500 clients. the reason i wanted to highlight that, this is a program that is completely homegrown.
it is $3 million in general fund, it provides services, they have the ability to help those that they serve. we find it has been very successful in filling the gap for seniors and people with disabilities. the second program we wanted to highlight just to show the growth in caseload, it has kind of tapered off the last couple of years. we know that the population will continue to grow, and we of the there will be some efforts by the state to contain some of the costs.
i wanted to show you that it has tapered off of the. >> can you speak quickly about where we expect state impact to be? i am not sure that those were implemented or not. >> if you still have questions, i can answer those. the biggest impact that white -- we might see is the governor's care initiative for long-term supports in services. there is an effort to put long- term care services into managed care. we don't know exactly what that is going to look like, the state is trying to figure that out. in some case management services, it will be involved in
that. the thought is that the same amount of money might go into those services, but the san francisco health plan and and come to be asked to manage those. we assume that down the road sometime, the health plans would actually end up having to manage the rate. that would be a real impact on the people research. they might start looking at how those services are offered. it is the most cost-effective or other ways we can provide those services as well. one of the things we're doing to stay at the forefront of this thing, we have a long-term care integration of0. investigation effort going on. -- integration and
investigation effort going on. we are delving into what it would mean to bring these services to san francisco. we have also involved the public health and a number of community partners. the idea is to come out with a plan for integrated services in san francisco. we know what the cost of that will apply, and they are attempting to look at that through a consumer perspective, how do we best integrate services? and also, understand how to get those services where to go. in the current year, you were
alluding to the cuts. the first was the 20% cut in hours across the board. that has been struck out and it looks like it will not take place at all. the second cut that is still on the table as a cut to domestic and related services. i don't know if you can see the slide. the first part of the slide shows that over 12,000 clients will be impacted by that cut if it were to take place. they don't lose services altogether, but they lose a portion of their hours. the actual cut would mean 128,000 hours cut. we don't think the legislature will be that interested. it has a lot of challenges.
supervisor chu: interested in what? >> we don't think the legislature will like this cut because it is politically difficult to make this. it impacts a lot of people, particularly those that provide services to them. supervisor chu: in the current year, there was a proposal to reduce hours by 20%, roughly? >> they backfill the portion of the budget just in case it was struck down. >> in terms of the domestic services component, is it something being proposed for the upcoming year? >> we don't know what will happen to that portion of the plan.
that is all i have right now. supervisor chu: to help me get my head around getting integrated into the management care plan, i know there are not a loton of details, but with the state be paying a certain percentage, the general fund and to the fed paying a certain percentage? it would go and the money would flow directly to some kind of a managed-care provider? >> we don't know what the maintenance effort will be, we have not been giving guidance on that yet. we think we have an opportunity here to impact the way the state makes its decisions, that is why we are doing the long-term care integration process.
> supervisor wiener: i have a question related to seniors. as you probably know, some of the work we are starting to do around this issue, you know it is a growing population and we really try to visit some of the unique needs. we're going to be putting together a task force to come up with some kind of policy recommendations, and want to make sure it is not one of those task forces that put out a report and it gathers dust.
i wanted to get the departmentt't's sense of lgbt seniors, what we could be doing. including in the context of the budget, and one of the things we are seeing is not collecting enough data. just really understanding the scop oe of the issue. i wanted to, you know, get your thoughts on that. and thank-you for committing resources to work with us on this. >> we are very interested in working with the task force. based on the way the language is written, will be talking a lot with some of the people that are involved in getting the task
force going. we're starting to look away we collect data, even if we are doing is good job as we could be, we're working to get some of that, the right questions into the systems that we use. in the past, there was this thinking they don't ask certain questions, and disrespect people's privacy, and we lost out on data because of that. we're looking at the system to see how we can do a better job. some of the people that were involved are on the a advisory council, and they have been pushing for that. i think we've been doing a good job with the limited funding we have to get deprogramming in making sure that we are training hall of the constituents and providers on how how to provide services to people. but we can certainly do better.
we're willing to work with the task force and are looking to its. >> a couple other significant things on the horizon, the aging with hiv, which is something that we are learning about, but it is going to be a bigger and bigger issue. it will put more demands, not just something to say, but the department of public health. and also the architectural barriers. i don't think we have grappled with enough as a city. people that financially are able to age, it is not a financial issue. they are trapped in their home or they can't leave because the
kids deal with architectural barriers. >> one of the things we are looking at, the idea of livable communities, you have a group that is starting, very preliminary, but looking into what it means to have a livable community for anyone. and what kinds of things make it livable community. those accessibility issues are a big piece of that. supervisor avalos: just to follow up on other questions, in my district, we have a large number of seniors and often aging employees and multi- generational households, and we don't have a lot of services. we could have some of the highest in the city.
i am wondering what the strategy is to reach out to seniors in the southern part of san francisco, and what these strategies are that you need to employ in order to reach the character of the population that we have. >> i think it is an issue city- wide that there are fewer social services in those areas. and i think we constantly struggle with the limited dollars with the geographic spectrum of san francisco. the senior centers or any of those things, we look at the geographical area had those providers are covering and we have done as well as we can. we're always willing to go on
and talk to constituents in the areas to figure out how we can do a better job. we had some providers that we were working with, and we need to figure out better way to spread the services out a little bit. we might need to have a further conversation of what that will look like in the district. supervisor avalos: we have been able to be somewhat at a standstill. they are pretty scattershot at times. there is a whole range of services that we need to look at. >> it might be good to set up a meeting. and also your whole district. >> is very similar in terms of the high aging population.
i know is in my district already, but we need to grow and figure out what strategies are building that we can work on. supervisor chu: thank you, supervisor avalos, for that question. we have a similar situation in the sunset where seniors are aging in place in their homes, and i am not sure we have the best connection to them making sure that we are doing ok. we recently had a service hall that was recently taken away, and part-time community where seniors can check in. we are looking forward to hearing about what we can do to help seniors in the sunset as well.
we would really like to hear from you about that. a follow-up question, you went through the budget overall in you were reading your target for the upcoming two years. i wanted to clarify, in the different production items, there is no call for senior services. in terms of the reduction target, this was inclusive of your entire department of budget, right? so there was not a huge impact on the document portion? >> again, we were able to balance in a way that would not impact services. supervisor chu: so the only area that it may affect those services is on contract savings?
>> right. supervisor chu: at this moment it looks like you have met the target except for the $5 million from the mayor's office? >> correct. supervisor chu: it may well be that the mayor's office will ask for additional cuts, i am guessing? >> supervisor, from the mayor's budget, yes, we continue to be in discussions with the budget, although you can see that they have been extremely helpful. we are still looking everywhere we can for additional money. supervisor chu: ok, thank you. colleagues, if we do not have any questions at this time, of like to open it up for public comment. i would like to draw attention to the fact that even though it books balanced at this moment, we are not sure if it is yet, because we need a decision from
the mayor's office. that's open this up for public comment. are there members of the public it wished to speak on this item? >> sethank you, supervisors. thank you for raising the item. it was exactly the peace that wanted to speak to. i can speak on behalf of the human services network, on behalf of the network in the providers, certainly my colleagues and provision service homeless folks were very grateful for the approach that the apartment " -- that the department took in the revenue approach. i think we are optimistic, but deeply concerned as well, should we have to go to the alternative plan. there has been little discussion
of that. i am sort of glad for that, because i think it adds to the ammunition of getting not enough revenue for balancing this. as i do not recall the numbers exactly, i think we were looking at something like $900,000 in the alternative plan, if that had to be called on. $600,000 cut from shelters. i think i am putting it on target, maybe $1 million cut to resource centers. of course, other cuts would have to happen as well. i had the misfortune of not being able to be at the meeting in hearing last week. i know that you cover the base on this, but i can only tell you that caught on that level would be nothing short of disastrous in terms of our ability as provider agencies to continue the services we are doing. i hope we do not go there.
i expect that we probably will not, but i just wanted to make sure that that did not escape your attention. thank you. supervisor chu: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, budget and finance. ♪ you have got money you have got rhythm you have got your services, man trying to do the best that you can you have got city rhythm you have got a budget money you have got your services trying to do the best that you can clear the ethics desk like the budget likes
you are going to hit the money heights you will be great you will be swell because the budget for human services will come up roses i can tell ♪ supervisor chu: thank you. are there other members of the public that wish to speak on this item? number one? seeing none, public item is closed -- public comment is closed. can we entertain a motion to continue this to the call of the chair? we can do that without objection. thank you to the department for your presentation. do we have any other items before us? >> that completes the agenda. supervisor chu: thank you, we are adjourned.